[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: well-formedness error

To: "Greg Stein" <gstein@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: well-formedness error
From: Asbjørn Ulsberg <asbjorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:02:45 +0200
Cc: Atom-Syntax <atom-syntax@xxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-id: <atom-syntax.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@xxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Opera M2/7.51 (Win32, build 3798)

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 06:54:04 -0700, Greg Stein <gstein@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I would consider XML well-formedness to be a basic prerequisite :-)

I agree, but I don't think that's consensus. At least not the last time this was discussed. As polling on the Wiki seems to be viewed as an unacceptable way to reach consensus, I don't really think we can say or do anything on this matter.

--
Asbjørn Ulsberg         -=|=-        asbjornu@xxxxxxxxxxx
«He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»

Follow-Ups:
- Re: well-formedness error
  - From: Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: well-formedness error
  - From: Paul Hoffman / IMC

References:
- well-formedness error
  - From: Anne van Kesteren
- Re: well-formedness error
  - From: Danny Ayers
- Re: well-formedness error
  - From: Greg Stein
- Re: well-formedness error
  - From: Danny Ayers
- Re: well-formedness error
  - From: Sam Ruby
- Re: well-formedness error
  - From: Greg Stein

Prev by Date: Re: Last look at W3C
Next by Date: Re: Last look at W3C
Previous by thread: Re: well-formedness error
Next by thread: Re: well-formedness error
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread